Russian America.

[ATP]

I just reading "Koniec rosyjskiej Ameryki" by Marek Budzisz/my translation - end of russian america"

He wrote about how russian conqered those lands,and when decided to sell it/after 1857 - they knew,that somebody would take it by force anyway,so they decide to sell it instead/

Basically,russians take only Aleut islands where they enslaved locals,on Alaska they had only few harbours,and local Tlinkit tribes armed by american merchants with muskets beat them every time they tried something.

But - things could changed,at least twice.:

1.In 1764 one of Catherina the whore minion proposed take entire land till California,and even that,if they were lucky.In OTL tsarica ultimately decide to focus on war with turks/she wonted Constantinopole/ and later swedes and Poland - but,let imagine that Russia ignore Turkey,Poland and Sweden and instead send soldiers and settlers there.
Till 1796 when they would be distracted by France entire coast could be theirs.

2.In 1816 russian ships sailed not only to Caiphornia,but also Hawaii.Tsar minions advised taking both Pacyfic shore,and Hawaii.
Till 1850,when USA become too strong,they could do both.

So,we have 2 scenarios:
1.Entire Pacyfic shore in russian hands till 1796 - what happen? I think,that they would take Calfornia after 1808 to "help" Spain,too.

2.Entire Pacyfic shore and Hawaii in russian hands in 1840 - what happen ? i think,that "helping" with revolution they would take Mexican shore,too

In both cases,they must remain England close friends - so no Crimean war here.

 

[ATP]

Scenario 1 - i think,that if tsars focused on America,they could ignore Europe till 1812 Napoleon invasion - which would still happen,becouse Russia would be England ally here.
And, they would take and keep California here.
Europe - Poland still exist/as weak country controlled by others/ ,America - weak USA unable to become local power.

Scenario 2 - too little,too late - USA here would kick russians out.

Any thoughtts? @Circle of Willis , maybe ?

 

[Circle of Willis]

Not an expert on Russian colonization and what could possibly motivate it being ramped up beyond what was the case historically, but this seems like a tough cookie. The Russians already have to start in Hard Mode (Alaska), it's so far away from their core of power that IIRC the venture was never all that profitable due to the sheer cost of transportation, and before even reaching Alaska they have the whole of Siberia to cross & settle there. Since oil & gas aren't important yet and wouldn't be for quite some time after Russian colonization begins, their main interest in Alaska (as it was IRL) would be furs, which they can already acquire in abundant quantity & variety back in Siberia anyway. (Plus it seems the Russians over-hunted the Alaskan fauna whose fur they cared about pretty quickly, cratering that attraction within a few decades.) I guess the gold in the Yukon might provide another motivator for colonization, but that was located decently far away inland and was tough to access (lots of mountains & river rapids to cross, and obviously Arctic conditions to deal with too; most of the gold was underground and they had to slowly, painstakingly get through the permafrost to mine it).

Pushing southward threatens to bring them into conflict with Spain, which already has overlapping claims and established missions (not merely religious missions despite the name, but including military outposts & settlements) across California. By the time the Russians established Fort Ross (their Californian fort) in 1812 IRL, the Spanish had already laid down most of their missions, and had in fact been doing so for 15 years before the Russians founded their first Alaskan settlement at Three Saints Bay (1784). I don't see the Russians having great success in contesting lands that far south with the Spanish (who already have massive and well-established bases for further anti-Russian operations nearby in Mexico), and while Napoleon's rampage will probably distract them, he'll distract the Russians too so it all balances out.

And then you also have the British expressing an interest in the Pacific Northwest in the 1790s (Nootka Crisis and the ensuing Convention)...plus the Americans, while not immediately relevant, are probably going to come to the Pacific sooner or later barring a US-screw which the Russians won't have a hand in (they can't influence stuff like the War of 1812 after all).

Tl;dr I think any significant Russian investment in the Pacific Coast is probably doomed to end up turning their possessions into a colder version of Alta California: looks impressive on a map, but too remote and populated with far too few people (even if they are willing to sink resources into a bigger effort to settle the place despite geography & the profit motive working against them, say comparable to the Spanish missions in Cali) for them to actually hold it once a party with greater interest & resources to bear (Britain, Spain or America) comes knocking.

A Russian Hawaii is also likely doomed once the US and/or Japan get their hands on steamship technology, the Russians had enough trouble just trying to find a decent warm-water port on their Pacific coast IRL and coupled with the Russian Navy's rather poor record in the 19th-early 20th centuries, I see no way in which they can meaningfully project naval power against (much less actually defeat) either. Meanwhile Hawaii's strategic location smack-dab in the middle of the Pacific makes it immensely attractive to America/Japan.